What: All Issues :
War & Peace :
H. Res. 557. War in Iraq and U.S. Troops/Vote to Allow Consideration of the Rules Governing Debate on a Resolution Which Would Reaffirm that the United States and the World are Safer with the Removal of Saddam Hussein and His Regime from Power in Iraq. (2004 house Roll Call 62)

H. Res. 557. War in Iraq and U.S. Troops/Vote to Allow Consideration of the Rules Governing Debate on a Resolution Which Would Reaffirm that the United States and the World are Safer with the Removal of Saddam Hussein and His Regime from Power in Iraq.

To mark the anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, House Republican and Democrats might have joined forces to draft a non-controversial resolution commending U.S. troops for their military victory. Such was not the case. Instead, House Republican leaders formulated the resolution to endorse President Bush's foreign policy leadership without the input from Democrats on the International Relations Committee. The key language in the resolution which caused a stir among Democrats stated that "the United States and the world have been made safer with the removal of Saddam Hussein and his regime." Democrats, including Progressives, offered a different account of President Bush's leadership. In their view, President Bush's go-it-alone strategy in Iraq needlessly alienated potential allies in the effort. As a result, they argued, the United States was paying a heavy price for military action in Iraq: 570 U.S. troops have been killed in action as of March 19, and the per-week cost of the occupation to U.S. taxpayers is $1 billion. Democrats also pointed to shortages of body armor and armored vehicles in Iraq to demonstrated the administration's lack of preparation for the postwar occupation. According to Representative Wexler (D-FL), "Iraq was not an imminent treat to America...There were no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. And there was no link between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. The only mushroom cloud resulting from the war in Iraq is that represented by the Bush administration's barrage of deception and lies." Conservatives, of course, saw the issue differently. During debate on the anniversary resolution, Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) asked opponents of the measure: "What would you have us do? Wait until Saddam proved that he had nuclear weapons by detonating one in New York City? Wait like we waited for al Qaeda to prove that they really meant business on September 11, 2001?" The subject of this vote was a motion to proceed to a vote on the rules governing debate on the underlying anniversary resolution (before legislation can be considered on the House floor, a rule drafted by the House Rules Committee-in essence an arm of the majority party leadership-must be adopted to set ground rules for debate). Progressives voted against the motion to proceed based on their objections to the underlying resolution, and Conservatives voted in favor based on their support for it. On a perfectly party line vote of 217-197, the motion to proceed was adopted and a vote on the rules of debate governing consideration of the anniversary resolution was scheduled.